lfnfandomcom-20200216-history
Forum:Sujestas (braien)
Parolas A ruling (legal) : un judida *Me ta dise simple "un judi". (Compare "un deside".) Simon *Me no oposa. Me ia pensa ce posible "judi" ta es alga cosa como "the proceeding, the process of adjudicating, the trial" ma aora me vide ce "judi" es ja "judgment" alora "judida" es probable nonesesada. An incumbent : un titulor *No mal. "Postor" ta es ance bon (de "posto", ne "posta"). Simon Cisa nos ta debe ave ance "acelun" e "estun" per evita la ambigua con "Acel teme es forte" etc? La usa de los no ta es comun o nesesada, ma disponible en casos como esta (p.e. on continua dise "Acel es forte" en frases simple, etc sin problem.) *On pote dise ja "acel un teme es forte" e "esta un teme es forte" si on desira. Simon *Serta, si acel es la opina final, me no oposa. Me sabe ce nos ia discuta lo en la pasada. Nos ave acel/aceles, esta/estas alora me no ia es serta ce on ta vole ave ance un forma per la singular. *Un problem peti con "acelun" e "estun" es ce los no ta es coerente con la formas simil "algun", "cadun", "cualcun" e "nun", cual refere sempre a persones. Si me comprende bon tua sujesta, "acelun" e "estun" ta pote inclui ance cosas – cualce cosas a cual "acel" e "esta" pote refere. Simon *Si, alora si lo no es preferable, on pote continue con "acel un / esta un" etc. En fato, me no ia sabe ce "algun / cadun / cualcun e nun" refere sempre a personas. Perce? "Me ave oto autos, *cadun* es un esemplo de un desenio esata", per esemplo... *Car tal nos ia defini lo :-) "Algun" es un corti de "alga person". Esta segue la model de distingui persones e cosas cual on vide ance en "el/lo", "ci/cual", etc. Me no recorda vide un frase en cual "esta" o "acel" es ambigua en pratica (an si on pote scrive frases cual es ambigua en teoria, sin contesto). Serta en otra casos, nos ia descovre ambiguas vera e ia ajusta la lingua per maneja los. A un tempo, nos ia ajunta "nul" per sinifia "no cosa", ma lo no ia survive longa. Simon *Pardona me per continui en engles: after the addition of so many words to the dictionary, including many technical and obscure terms, what are your feelings for differentiating between "must" and "should"? Correct me if I'm wrong, but currently we have: **"need to" : nesesa : Me nesesa vade. (I need to go) **"must" : debe : Me debe vade. (I must go) **"should" : debe : Me debe vade (I should go) *To me, the difference between "need to", "must" and "should" are slight but important when speaking with precision, and for showing the degree of motivation behind action. "Need to" implies a personal need, "must" implies something agreed upon as important but perhaps unwilling, and "should" implies a social or practical obligation. The Romance languages all have representations of these ideas in their lexicon. In particular, they use the verb for "must" (devoir / deber / etc) also for "to owe", implying that a debt is not merely a social suggestion but something concrete and serious. Consider also: **I should have saved her : Me ia debe salva el **I had to save her : Me ia debe salva el **I had to speak English in the meeting : Me ia debe parla engles en la encontra **I should have spoken English in the meeting : Me ia debe parla engles en la encontra **Should humanity colonize other planets? : Esce umania debe coloni otra planetes? **Must humanity colonize other planets? : Esce umania debe coloni otra planetes? **Should the prisoner be executed? : Esce la prisonida debe es esecutada? **Must the prisoner be executed? : Esce la prisonida debe es esecutada? **I needed to speak to my neighbor : Me ia nesesa parla a mea visina **I had to speak to my neighbor : Me ia debe parla a mea visina **I should have spoken to my neighbor : Me ia debe parla a mea visina ***In particular, these three phrases show good precision of meaning that is currently difficult to express in Elefen *These examples are in English, but you can translate into the Romance languages and you will see that their forms vary while the Elefen sentences do not. It's clearly something that speakers of these languages have found useful. A dedicated verb for "should" would open up clear past, present and future sentences with clear meaning. In the past, I have suggested something like "dove" as it follows the sounds in French and Italian but this is an idea for the purposes of conversation and others could select a different word if they chose. *Sorry for dredging up old subjects; considering the growth of the dictionary I figured it would be appropriate to ask. **Thanks for raising this interesting topic. My understanding is that "nesesa" indicates an essential requirement (personal, physical, part of a specification, etc), "debe" indicates a duty or debt within society, and "ta debe" (which is possibly the key item you've overlooked) indicates a weak obligation that a person senses but maybe doesn't act on. There's a grey area between "nesesa" and "debe": "I have to" can be "me nesesa" or "me debe" depending on the reason why. "I should have saved her" is "me ia ta debe salva el". "Should humanity colonize other planets?" is "Esce umanas [not umania] ta debe coloni otra planetas?" All three ("nesesa", "debe", "ta debe") appear in the dictionary, but possibly their presentation could be made clearer. The problem is that it's very difficult to supply a useful definition of these items without offering a lengthy set of examples, as you have helpfully done here. Simon **I did know of "ta debe" but have considered it "would must / would have to / would owe" following the definitions I've seen of debe, thinking it to be a hypothetical "must"...it's hard for me to reconcile the difference in potential meaning between personal need, compulsion and obligation / expectation. "It's good that you came, me ia ta debe coce" is it: "...I would have had to cook" or "...I should have cooked", for example. If I use "ta debe" in "Me ia ta debe parla engles en la encontra" is it: "I would have had to speak English in the meeting" or "I should have spoken English in the meeting", etc? "The only pizza the office ordered came with pepperoni, as a vegetarian me ia ta debe come lo"...am I being bitter or regretful? ;-) **Thanks: I see your point more clearly now. All I can do is offer my view; if a new fundamental item of vocabulary is to be introduced, that's a decision for Jorj. So here's my view: "Ta" indicates an alternative world, where things were or will be different. "Me ia ta debe coce" means either "in an alternative world in which you didn't come (to help me), I would have to do the cooking myself" or "in an alternative world where I was expecting you to visit, I would have cooked something for you". No doubt plenty of other alternative-world interpretations of this sentence can be dreamed up, too. But surely the context usually makes it clear what is meant; and in cases where it doesn't, one adds extra words. The system "nesesa, debe, ta debe" corresponds to "bezonas, devas, devus" in Esperanto, and in thirty years of using that language I don't think I've ever come across a case where I've been bothered by (or have even noticed) an ambiguity. (That's not to say there aren't ambiguities; but there are ambiguities in everything.) To express regret about not eating the pizza, you can say "me regrete no come lo"; for bitterness, "me no ia pote come lo". Simon okay, here is my take on the situation (at length!): first, as simon says, "debe" refers to a social or personal need, while "nesesa" refers to a more emphatic, physical need. The two overlap somewhat, as they do in many languages - sometimes social obligations are backed by force, and sometimes physical necessity is only in the mind of the actor - but the intent can be easily seen in context. the distinction is parallel to that between "obligated" and "forced" as well. your best bet is to think of "debe" as "be obligated to" and "ta" as the conditional (and subjunctive) in the romance languages, approximately expressed in english with "would". "ia ta" is approximately "would have". therefore: *me es un bon re - I am a good king *me ia es un bon re - I was a good king *me ta es un bon re - I would be a good king *me ia ta es un bon re - I would have been a good king *me debe es un bon re - I am obligated to be a good king *me ia debe es un bon re - I was obligated to be a good king *me ta debe es un bon re - I would be obligated to be a good king *me ia ta debe es un bon re - I would have been obligated to be a good king note how the "ta" and "ia ta" expressions should really be seen as part of a conditional or subjunctive sentence. the different interpretations of "me ia ta debe parla engles en la encontra" depend on another part of the sentence. So... *si me ia ta sabe ce mea ospita no parla elefen, me ia ta debe parla engles - if I had known that my host didn't speak elefen, I would have been obligated to speak english *me no ia ta atende, si me ia ta debe parla engles - I would not have attended, if I would have been obligated to speak english *me teme ce me ta debe parla engles - I fear that I would be obligated to speak english *me espera ce me ta debe parla engles - I hope that I would be obligated to speak english (note how we can use "ta" en both halves of a conditional sentence, as is true in many languages. also note that we are not obligated to use "ta" at all, since conditional and subjunctive sentences are already indicated by the "if" or the kind of verb used.) jorj *Thank you for the explanations. I think what I am missing then is a sense of compulsion (if "nesesa" is for need, and "debe" for obligation / should), hopefully with a way to show personal need contrasted with compulsion. *I believe both French and Spanish have methods for clearly delineating between the senses: **I need to work (J'ai besoin de travailler / Necesito trabajar) ***me nesesa labora **I have to (must) work (Je dois travailler / Tengo que trabajar or Debo trabajar) ***me debe labora (dois and debo are the first person present of devoir/deber) **I should work (Je devrais travailler / Debería trabajar) ***me ta debe labora (debrais and debería are the first person conditional) **It is imperative that I work (Il faut que je travaille / Hay que trabajo) ***lo es multe importante ce me labora (il faut que and hay que is the same, really as debe or nesesa, just a bit more forceful) jorj ***Lo debe ce me labora ? ;-) ****"Debe" no sinifia "es multe importante". Si "lo es importante ce me labora" sinifia "la fato de mea labora es bon", alora "lo debe ce me labora" sinifia "la fato de mea labora debe" (ma lo debe cual? lo debe fa cual? on no dise, donce la frase es strana). "On obliga me a labora", "me es obligada a labora", "lo importa estrema ce me labora". Como Jorj, me vide poca difere de sinifia entre "need" e "be imperative that", estra la grado de fortia. Simon *Sorry for going back over, I just want to be clear in my understanding. The current definition of "debe" being simultaneously "owe / must / have to / need to" *and* "should / ought to" I find to be a bit problematic (unless it is including "ta" variants by default.) **For clarity, I reckon we should remove "should" and "ought to" from the dictionary translations of "debe", but leave them at "ta debe". There are cases where "should" does (or can) correspond to "debe" – the first sentence in this paragraph being one! – but these words are such a muddle in English that a concise dictionary entry can't really do them justice. A lengthy essay could be written! Simon ***we could move "should" and "ought to" to the end of the list, just before (social obligation), or perhaps include "see 'ta vide'". jorj ***don't forget we can also say "me es obligada a labora" and "me es forsada a labora", which clarify and accentuate "debe" and "nesesa". jorj *Esperanto, as Simon mentioned, apparently has a similar / same ambiguity, https://esperanto.stackexchange.com/questions/197/why-does-devus-translate-as-should Demandas Como dise cosas como: *Go Swans! / Go Manchester City! / etc : la usa de "vade" con un ojeto seguente pare transforma la sinifia de la frase, nontransitiva a transitiva. Per esemplo: "Parla forte!" o "Sorti la enfantes! (evacuate the children)" es clar, e "Vade a el!" es ance clar, ma "Vade la sinies" no pare clar. La gida sujesta ce on ta dise: Ta ce la sinies vade (me pensa.) **Coreta. "Vade la sinies" sinifia "causa ce la sinies vade". Ma en "go, team!", la parola "team" es vocativa. Per indica esta, on nesesa mera un virgula, o un tono de vose: "Vade, ecipo!" o "Ecipo, vade!" Simon *Long live the king! La disionario ave: "Vive la re!" Esce esta no debe es "Ta ce la re vive"? "Vive la via jentil" "Long live the gentle life!" o "Live the gentle life?" (Me pensa eleje du) **On pote dise "ta ce la re vive" (may the king live), ma "vive la re" es ance bon. Lo sinifia "causa ce la re vive", cual es esensal la mesma idea. Tu ia scrive "via" en loca de "vive", ma "vive la vive jentil" sinifia "live the gentle life". La difere es ce res vive, ma vives no vive. Per "long live the gentle life", me sujesta "ta ce la vive jentil es longa" o "ta ce on vive jentil e longa". Simon **Me pote pensa sur esemplos o situas do on ta vole promove un cosa astrata, como "Vive la vive jentil" o "Vive la cosini franses!", "Vive la injenia deutx!", idomes como estas es alga frecuente en linguas...alora, cisa on pote eleje per "ta ce la ..." per ave un forma esata. **Un vive longa a la cosini franses! Un vive longa a la injenia deutx! Simon Un cosa en cual engles (pare a me) multe forte es la reusa simple de nomes como verbos sin cambia los. "Give me the hammer", "I hammer the nail" etc. Me no recorda si me ia mensiona lo, ma con la ajunta de pronomes de posese en elefen, on no ave nun ambigua en esta casos / on ta pote elimina alga verbos cual fini en -i cual mostra la usa de un nom, o la ata pertinente a un sustantia. *Me martel la clo. **Verbos debe fini con un vocal, afin on pote ajunta -nte e -da per formi la partisipios. Simon **Si, seguente la regulas presente. *Me ia vomita forte en la note pasada. *Me pinta la casa. Con ajetivos, on ta vole probable reteni la -i per mostra la ata de deveni, p.e. roja -> roji, etc. Sola un nota en pasa. Esta ta es un simpli en la lingua, ma un cambia no peti. **Serta no peti, e lo ta pote deveni confusante, en mea opina. "Mea pinta" ta es ambigua: "my paint" o "mine paints". Simon **Me suposa ce me no parteni la teme sur la confusa, "my paints" ta es "mea pintas", "my paint" coletiva ta es "mea pinta" ma cadun es diferente. :-) **Me ia scrive "mine paints", no "my paints". "Mine paints" = "mine is the one that does the painting". Car on pote reusa cada ajetivo como un nom, la usa de "pinta" como un verbo ta crea ambiguas. On no ta sabe esce on ave "ajetivo-como-nom + verbo" o "ajetivo + nom". Simon **Un plu razona contra la sutrae de -i es ce "un telefon" no es "un telefoni", "un martel" no es "un marteli", "la pinta de la porte" no es "la pinti de la porte". Simon **Vera, acel es un bon punto. Esce tu trova ce esta es ance (ma min) vera per verbos como dona? "Tua dona (one-time contribution? continual efforts?) a la projeta es impresante!" **Me no comprende clar tua demanda. Cada verbo en elefen pote es reusada como un nom, an si no verbo corespondente esiste en engles/espaniol/etc. "La dona" es serta bon: lo sinifia "giving", per esemplo "la dona es bon" (it's good to give), "la dona de la premios va aveni a la ora 4" (the prizegiving will take place at 4 o'clock), etc. Simil per "tua dona". On pote tradui "la dona" ance como "the gift", si "gift" sinifia "giving" (e no "thing given", "la donada"). Simon **Bon, me ia mensiona lo car en la disionario lo ave "dona (nom): contribution, donation, grant, endowment" e un "contribution" a *un* punto en tempo es diferente ca la ata de dona repetante o continual. "Grasias per tua dona" e.g. "Thank you for your contribution" o "Thank you for your giving (continual, sustained.)". On ave un ambigua ala, un poca como la ambigua con "la pinta de la porte." Me no vole dise ce esta es sever, lo ia es sola un nota en pasa. **Nos ave la mesma problem en engles con la parola "contribution". Ma lo no es un problem, car parolas es usada en contestos. La difere entre "pinta" (un sustantia) e "pinti" (la ata de aplica acel sustantia) es multe plu grande ca la difere entre un dona a un ves e un dona repetente. Si on nesesa clari, on pote dise "Grasias per tua dona continuante" o simple "Grasias per tua donas". Simon Encontra la Familia La PDF per la libro es asi: Encontra-la-Familia.pdf Si algun vole compra un copia de la libro per un donada o otra razona, on pote compra lo asi: http://www.bookemon.com/book-profile/encontra-la-familia/668393 Me no gania multe mone de esta (me no ave sonias de ricia -- hehe) la custa es sempre alta per libros autonom. Simon, cual tu pensa sur ajunta un lia a la paje a supra per ce on ta pote compra la libro si on vole? A veses persones gusta ave un copie dur de libros, e (me pensa) esta ta mostra la rici continual de la colie de libros en la lingua. Como me ia dise, me no ave sonia de ricia, lo ta es simple per aida otras. *Cisa tu ta pote ajunta un lia en la PDF mesma? Simon *Acel es un bon idea, e me pote recrea la PDF, ma me ia es pensante ance sur cisa / un dia ave un parte sur elefen.org "Bibliography" do on ta pote vide tota la libros en la lingua cual es disponible. La lista va crese, e cisa lo ta es un bon idea a mostra un parte sempre-cresente. Si no oji, cisa un dia en la futur. *La bibliografia es ance un bon idea. Cisa nos pote ajunta lo pos la primi de la disionario, cuando la contenida va es… tre libros! Simon La Note Me ia crea esta alga dias ante aora (november 10 cuasi) pos la eleje de la autocrata fol (ma lo ta pote es un canta jeneral per fortia en la oscuria), lo es un varia prima, por favor dise a me si me debe coreti alga cosa. Me pote pone la liricas asi, ance. (Esce algun ia crea sempre un canta en elefen, o esce me es la prima?) La Note *Guido ia scrive poesias, ma lo pare ce tu es la prima ci ia scrive un canta. Lo sona bela! Ma me no susede oia tota la parolas – esta es un fenomeno comun de cantas, e no un critica de tua rejistra. Per favore, scrive la parolas asi. (O! me ia oblida cuasi ce me ia tradui un canta – en La cade de la Casa de Usor – e ia canta an lo en la fix audio de acel raconta. Ma me no es capas de scrive cantas orijinal :-) Simon *Grasias per la parolas jentil, la liricas es... Me regarda la ueste e la sol asconde se Me vide lo aveni Me no pote crede La note ia cade sur nos No modo per evita per evita los Me espera un brilia Cisa nos pote recomensa Nos ta pote luta dur Tra tempos oscur Nos resta asi per sempre Nos va es asi per sempre Los no pote vinse vinse...no La foco arde pur Lo lumina tempos oscur Lumina de pas e belia Mostra a nos la via Nos releva per la dia Nos releva per sonia Nosa vole brilia forte An con la note *Eselente. La sola cosa cual me ta ajusta en esta ta es ajunta "ce" ante "lo aveni". Simon *A si, grasias! Me pote cambia acel en la varia prosima. Esperimentas Si on vole vide a alga tempo me scrives (me fa lo per pratica e esperimenta), on pote vide los asi: https://www.reddit.com/r/elefa/ #Marcor de la aspeta perfeta "eve" (en engles) #Dove (should) e piva (may) Imajina la futur... Ante cuando elefen concista la mundo, me pote imajina un futur do alga persones usa alga cortis, serta en parla. Esta no es un colie de sujestas (donce, on no debe reata), ma sola un colie de imajinas / juas diverti per me. Brimlar2 *La come de matina La cometina **o "comatina"? jorj **Si, me gusta ance acel, lo es bela Brian *La come de sera La comesera **e per come de media dia... "comedia"! :o) jorj **E si on senti malada pos la come, esta es vera un tradijesta :) Simon *Ante aora aa *On oia, "La sds" per la sentro de site (como "CBD") *On oia, "Me i'ave..." en cuando parlante rapida *On oia, "Me i'es..." en cuando parlante rapida *'mub' o mb per "mera un broma" / "mera bromante" (en engles: "just kidding" o "only joking", a veses videda en la cortis "jk", "j/k", "JK" etc) **o posible mb ("mera bromante"). nota ce, en lfn, cortis es scriveda con leteras minor. jorj **O "mbm" (me broma mera). Simon *Esc'el en media de core? nota ce on pote usa l' e d' en parla rapida (o an en scrive) ante un parola cual comensa con un vocal, si tu vole. me pensa ce s' (per se) es ance oce. e posible i', como tu sujeste a supra. en poesia, on pote cade un vocal final si la parola seguente comensa con un vocal, spesial si la parola prima es un determinante. nos usa la formas plen per articles en la vici e en la disionario per es clar e "ofisial". :o) ma tu ideas es multe divertinte! jorj *Bon a sabe sur la oportun (cuando en parla) de usa alga metodos como aceles! Si, lo es divertinte, grasias. ;-) Brian tempos Me fa un folia de tempos de verbos usante pasea per pratica, lo es un de la razonas perce me demanda la demanda a supra. (lia: Tempos -- Google Docs) Brimlar2